Cabrol Alice, Chuy Virginie, Fron-Chabouis Hélène, Naveau Adrien
Private practice, Bordeaux, France.
Hospital University Practitioner, Public Health Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Bordeaux University, Bordeaux University Hospital, Saint-André Hospital, Bordeaux, France.
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Sep 19. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.014.
Additive manufacturing is used in prosthodontics for producing casts, surgical guides, and interim and definitive prostheses. Printed resin components that will be in contact with the oral mucosa must meet biocompatibility requirements in accordance with current standards for medical devices. Despite such approvals being obtained by the manufacturer, the dentist remains responsible for following the manufacturer recommendations. Evidence for the effect of postprocessing 3-dimensionally (3D) printed resin components on biocompatibility is lacking PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of 3D printing postprocessing on the biocompatibility of resins that will be in contact with the oral mucosa.
The PubMed, Scopus, and DOSS search engines were used to identify articles. Two independent researchers conducted the systematic review by following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and by following a combination of keywords.
Of a total of 249 articles, 27 were selected, including only 1 in vivo study. Thirty-two commercially available and a few experimental resins were tested. The main applications were removable denture bases and denture teeth, interim and definitive fixed restorations, occlusal splints, and surgical guides. Postprocessing procedures were those recommended by the manufacturer, experimental, or not implemented and involving alcohol, ultrasonic or centrifugal rinsing, photopolymerization at different UV wavelengths, a nitrated atmosphere chamber with air drying or compressed air drying and with heat treatment. The majority of postprocessed 3D printed resins were reported to be noncytotoxic, implying sufficient biocompatibility.
The heterogeneity of materials and methods did not allow the identification of an ideal postprocessing protocol or of the need for additional steps after following the manufacturer's recommendations.
增材制造在口腔修复学中用于制作模型、手术导板以及临时和最终修复体。与口腔黏膜接触的打印树脂部件必须符合当前医疗器械标准的生物相容性要求。尽管制造商已获得此类批准，但牙医仍有责任遵循制造商的建议。缺乏关于三维（3D）打印树脂部件后处理对生物相容性影响的证据。目的：本系统评价的目的是评估3D打印后处理对与口腔黏膜接触的树脂生物相容性的有效性。
使用PubMed、Scopus和DOSS搜索引擎识别文章。两名独立研究人员按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）指南并结合关键词组合进行系统评价。
在总共249篇文章中，筛选出27篇，其中仅1篇体内研究。测试了32种市售树脂和一些实验树脂。主要应用包括可摘义齿基托和义齿牙齿、临时和最终固定修复体、咬合板以及手术导板。后处理程序为制造商推荐的、实验性的或未实施的，包括酒精、超声或离心冲洗、不同紫外线波长下的光聚合、带空气干燥或压缩空气干燥及热处理的硝化气氛箱。据报道，大多数后处理的3D打印树脂无细胞毒性，意味着具有足够的生物相容性。
材料和方法的异质性使得无法确定理想的后处理方案，也无法确定在遵循制造商建议后是否需要额外步骤。
